First Impression Poll

[Sterling Archer]

Here's a good viewpoint from CNN Money:

http://money.cnn.com/video/luxury/2...-first-drive.cnnmoney/index.html?iid=HP_River



They focused a lot on how much better it handles and the new interior. The Money team gets their hands on a lot of super cars, so I think it's just confirmation this model is about stepping into the modern sports car realm (and less about the pissing war with Camaro).

Sponsored

 

[wilkinda65]

Camaro........ I watched one get smoked from a stop today by a F250 with 8" lift kit. I initally thought the Camaro was gonna haul ass as it sounded bad ass.... nope

 

[Papaya]

S550 vs BMW M-class?

Reading all the posts about the Mustang vs. M3/M4 lets me wondering, why in hell would someone compare this two cars? That's the same old story like to compare an apple with an orange. Again. I am from Germany and know a little bit about BMW and the "M -BMW's". Everyone can read that on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M3 .

The new S550 is a "all days car" and not made to compete with an Porsche 911. The M3 was made to compete against the Porsche 911.

"Upgrades over the "standard" 3-Series automobiles include more powerful and responsive engines, improved handling/suspension/braking systems, aerodynamic body enhancements, and interior/exterior accents with the tri-colour "M" (Motorsport) emblem."

Going from here, I would say, if you make the same changes on a 2015 Mustang, the Mustang would do as good as any BMW M class car. For people who like to compare BMW M class to Mustang should wait for the GT 350/ 500/ BOSS/RUSH or what ever is coming in the future of the S550.

The Mustang is a "classic" muscle car only from the past. Most cars today have more or equally HP than the V6/EcoBoost like my wife's Grand Cherokee or most of the Pickup's on the roads.

So for anyone who likes to compare the 2015 Mustang to a BMW, please, compare it to the BMW 3/4 class and not M3/4 class. Because if you take out all modifications from a M-class BMW and let only the better engine in the BMW, I am sure the BMW would struggle too to make a good race time.

Sorry for my bad English, but I hope you can understand what I am trying to explain.

My 1.st impression of the S550? I honestly do not know why this question was asked, because most of us didn't get hands on the new Mustang. :shrug:
Reading the first reviews I am not surprised about the car but more about the bad "reporting". No real details. No video about the car. I am sure that there are better pictures from this car here posted from members on this site. His turn/Her turn made a little bit a video mostly talking about the car and no deep input. I can't even find "1st drive videos" on Youtube or using Google search. I am more use to see detailed videos about new cars from Germany like the ones from ADAC (like AMA/CAA) made on the 1st time they get hand on a new car.... :help:

 

[jrease]

Count me in the impressed category. I dont know how you could read these reviews and not be actually but guess everyone's expectations are different. IMO hard to deny it is the best bang for the buck out there hands down.

Now i just need to get my pennies in order , the waiting is killin me!

 

[erne75]

Yes. Actually it is. I take you aren't an engineer, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but you have no idea just how difficult it is to meet all the new safety regulations and also try to increase the quality while keeping costs down. Something has to give.

You got me there, I'm not a mechanical engineer but back in the 90's the following cars, at the end of their run in the US, were being criticized for gaining too much weight in order to comply with regulations.

98 Toyota Supra Twinturbo 3445 lbs.
96 Nissan 300ZX Twinturbo 3502 lbs.
98 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 3737 lbs.

Still the Mitsu, with a heavy AWD system came out weighting less than the new Mustang. Yes, none of the cars were V8s but their were all Twinturbos with all the accompanying plumbing plus intercooler(s). Never mind we have had almost 20 years of engineering and research in new materials and manufacturing techniques.

Am I too believe the new Mustang is a vastly superior and safer car that requires the extra weight to comply? I guess that I can partially blame the Government once again for denying me the things that I want and as usually costing me extra money. After all I dont need a bunch of overpaid bureaucrats telling what they "think" is best for me (and forcing me to do accept their decisions) so screw the EPA and the NHTSA. In this case I think Ford engineers dropped the ball as well.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Still the Mitsu, with a heavy AWD system came out weighting less than the new Mustang. Yes, none of the cars were V8s but their were all Twinturbos with all the accompanying plumbing plus intercooler(s). Never mind we have had almost 20 years of engineering and research in new materials and manufacturing techniques.

Am I too believe the new Mustang is a vastly superior and safer car that requires the extra weight to comply? I guess that I can partially blame the Government once again for denying me the things that I want and as usually costing me extra money. After all I dont need a bunch of overpaid bureaucrats telling what they "think" is best for me (and forcing me to do accept their decisions) so screw the EPA and the NHTSA. In this case I think Ford engineers dropped the ball as well.

Yes, and a lot of those materials went into making the chasis itself lighter. But those cars also don't even have a fraction of the electronic systems the new cars have - and I'm talking cars in general. Surround speaker systems, sync, all the driver assistance stuff, premium materials - they all add weight.

Look, I get that you're just going to have to take my word on it a bit, but it's actually a lot harder than most people think it is to cut weight and improve interior quality. Should you be happy with it? Well that's for you to decide. But should you think that the engineers dropped the ball? No, absolutely not. Styling added the majority of the weight; they did their job in shaving off weight from the actual core vehicle.

 

[Malikona]

Reading all the posts about the Mustang vs. M3/M4 lets me wondering, why in hell would someone compare this two cars? That's the same old story like to compare an apple with an orange. Again. I am from Germany and know a little bit about BMW and the "M -BMW's". Everyone can read that on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M3 .

The new S550 is a "all days car" and not made to compete with an Porsche 911. The M3 was made to compete against the Porsche 911.

Going from here, I would say, if you make the same changes on a 2015 Mustang, the Mustang would do as good as any BMW M class car. For people who like to compare BMW M class to Mustang should wait for the GT 350/ 500/ BOSS/RUSH or what ever is coming in the future of the S550.

The Mustang is a "classic" muscle car only from the past. Most cars today have more or equally HP than the V6/EcoBoost like my wife's Grand Cherokee or most of the Pickup's on the roads.

So for anyone who likes to compare the 2015 Mustang to a BMW, please, compare it to the BMW 3/4 class and not M3/4 class. Because if you take out all modifications from a M-class BMW and let only the better engine in the BMW, I am sure the BMW would struggle too to make a good race time.

Sorry for my bad English, but I hope you can understand what I am trying to explain.

My 1.st impression of the S550? I honestly do not know why this question was asked, because most of us didn't get hands on the new Mustang. :shrug:
Reading the first reviews I am not surprised about the car but more about the bad "reporting". No real details. No video about the car. I am sure that there are better pictures from this car here posted from members on this site. His turn/Her turn made a little bit a video mostly talking about the car and no deep input. I can't even find "1st drive videos" on Youtube or using Google search. I am more use to see detailed videos about new cars from Germany like the ones from ADAC (like AMA/CAA) made on the 1st time they get hand on a new car.... :help:

I will race your wife's Grand Cherokee in my 2015 EcoBoost any day of the week.

 

[TexArmageddon]

Yes, and a lot of those materials went into making the chasis itself lighter. But those cars also don't even have a fraction of the electronic systems the new cars have - and I'm talking cars in general. Surround speaker systems, sync, all the driver assistance stuff, premium materials - they all add weight.

Look, I get that you're just going to have to take my word on it a bit, but it's actually a lot harder than most people think it is to cut weight and improve interior quality. Should you be happy with it? Well that's for you to decide. But should you think that the engineers dropped the ball? No, absolutely not. Styling added the majority of the weight; they did their job in shaving off weight from the actual core vehicle.

:amen: I keep trying to tell the 2016 Camaro fans this with their new beloved Alpha Platform.. They're honestly expecting a Camaro 300lbs lighter.. Yet, no realizing the car needs to cater to as many customers as possible.. Meaning it needs to be cheap and great interior. Makes shaving 300lbs that much harder.

 

[Old 5 Oh]

I'm shocked to read that anyone thought the car would go faster 0-60 than 4.4 seconds or do the 1/4 mile is anything less than 12.8-13.0 seconds.

I don't recall reading any marketing stuff that implied this would be the case. The performance numbers are exactly what I though they would be. Because that is what the research I did told me (marketing, forums, etc).

It wasn't the marketing stuff. We knew the engine was going to be more powerful, and I don't think any of us really thought it would be 3,800 pounds loaded. Given a cleaner launch with the IRS, it would have been a bit faster, and that would have been very low 4s 0-60. Didn't happen. Though I remain interested to see what MM&FF manages with their experienced drag racer testers and more aggressive techniques.

 

[Old 5 Oh]

One of the things I'd be interested to see would be a head-to-head test w/ a '15 GT PP car vs a '14 GT PP car and then a Boss.

Someone will do this. No one has a track time on the new PP yet, and that's the metric Ford actually claimed to improve. There is every likelihood that the PP could best the Boss around a track while being a tick or two slower up the straights. I am anxious to see.

NOT that I would base my buying decision on the outcome. Win, lose or draw that track test, the S550 is FAR more suited to how I want to use it. The Boss, while an exciting ride, I'm sure, is just too much for an everyday car. Too stiff, too loud, too in your face. The more refined nature of the S550 is exactly what I want to have.

 

[wjones14]

Yes, and a lot of those materials went into making the chasis itself lighter. But those cars also don't even have a fraction of the electronic systems the new cars have - and I'm talking cars in general. Surround speaker systems, sync, all the driver assistance stuff, premium materials - they all add weight.

Look, I get that you're just going to have to take my word on it a bit, but it's actually a lot harder than most people think it is to cut weight and improve interior quality. Should you be happy with it? Well that's for you to decide. But should you think that the engineers dropped the ball? No, absolutely not. Styling added the majority of the weight; they did their job in shaving off weight from the actual core vehicle.

Exactly right. I'm sort of cross-shopping the '15 Mustang, '15 BMW M235i, and '16 Camaro. Just looked at the M235i in person yesterday. That car is a foot shorter than the S550, 6" narrower, considered a semi-compact coupe, and yet it still weights in at over 3500 lbs. If that's the best BMW could do with the weight, then Ford didn't do a bad job considering the comforts and drivability features in the S550.

 

[Sterling Archer]

Looks like at least the majority of you guys get it .

Honestly if the weight is an issue, go for a hot hatch. I've got a great thread going on in the versus section, and after testing driving a few cars (including the mustang GT), I thought that unquestionably the Fiesta ST destroyed everything in the fun factor. I don't want to derail this thread, but we do have a great discussion going on if you guys want to join in (over there, not here).

 

[S550_Magnetic]

M3/4s are hitting low 12s and some mags have gotten as high as 121mph, this is with the manual cars. The DCT cars are 12.1@121mph. Lets face it, it will be a GT350 that competes directly with the M3/4.

The M4 Starts at $64,000. That's a stupid comparison. I am paying $40k for my 2015 GT. Give me another $24,000 to put into it and it will demolish that M4 in every aspect...

 

[S550_Magnetic]

You got me there, I'm not a mechanical engineer but back in the 90's the following cars, at the end of their run in the US, were being criticized for gaining too much weight in order to comply with regulations.

98 Toyota Supra Twinturbo 3445 lbs.
96 Nissan 300ZX Twinturbo 3502 lbs.
98 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR4 3737 lbs.

Still the Mitsu, with a heavy AWD system came out weighting less than the new Mustang. Yes, none of the cars were V8s but their were all Twinturbos with all the accompanying plumbing plus intercooler(s). Never mind we have had almost 20 years of engineering and research in new materials and manufacturing techniques.

Am I too believe the new Mustang is a vastly superior and safer car that requires the extra weight to comply? I guess that I can partially blame the Government once again for denying me the things that I want and as usually costing me extra money. After all I dont need a bunch of overpaid bureaucrats telling what they "think" is best for me (and forcing me to do accept their decisions) so screw the EPA and the NHTSA. In this case I think Ford engineers dropped the ball as well.

1997 Toyota Supra Turbo 0-60 mph 5.0 Quarter mile 13.4
1995 Nissan 300ZX Turbo 0-60 mph 5.4 Quarter mile 13.7
1997 Mitsubishi 3000GT VR-4 0-60 mph 4.7 Quarter mile 13.4

Those cars were heavy and underpowered... None of them can touch the s550 without modifications. How many of those cars had the same amount of airbags as the Mustang? Government regulations are a big reason that cars keep on getting heavier...

Twice as Many Airbags
The 2015 Ford Mustang will include twice as many airbags as the current model with a total of eight airbags in both the fastback and convertible form with a few unique features with the different roof setup. The 2015 Mustang fastback comes with dual front airbags, a driver’s side knee airbag, dual side impact airbags mounted in the seats, and the innovative new passenger’s side knee airbag that is mounted in the face of the glove box. The 2015 Mustang fastback comes with side curtain airbags and the convertible comes with airbags that protect your head when the top is up or down. The vast majority of those airbags are common among a great many vehicles, but the passenger’s side knee airbag is a first for the S550 Mustang. - See more at:http://***************.com/106/new-2015-ford-mustang-will-be-safest-mustang-ever http://***************.com/106/new-2015-ford-mustang-will-be-safest-mustang-ever#sthash.hThEfTa1.dpuf

 

[SVTFreak]

Don't forget the cost of those cars back then. Inflation and similar equipped would put them heavy and much more expensive than the Mustang. They where cool for their time but their time is over and gone. For a reason. They've been replaced.

Sponsored